Appellant's criminal appeal pending since 2000 involving a 1996 cheating complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's consistent absence and previous failures to appear.
The criminal appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 905 Cr.Apeal 583-2000.doc
Sequeira
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 583 OF 2000
Omprakash Teerathram Sharma. .. Appellant Vs The State of Maharashtra & anr. .. Respondents
None for the Appellant.
Mr.P.H.Gaikwad –Patil, APP, for Respondent – State.
None for Respondent No.2.
Coram : N.M.Jamdar, J. Date : 11 August 2017.
P.C. :
None for the Appellant.
905 Cr.Apeal 583-2000.doc
did not provide any employment. The learned Magistrate found that the Complainant himself was acting as a middleman and the Complainant could not stated to have been cheated. The candidates who were supposed to have been cheated did not file this complaint against the Respondent No.2-accused. The learned Magistrate, considering the evidence on record, acquitted the Respondentaccused. The Appeal is pending since the year 2000. On various occasions Appellant has not remained present. The Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Omprakash Teerathram Sharma
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent No. 2
N.M. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
